nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Border Poll discussion

segarox

i hope some people from northern ireland are reading this because it concerns them.

i've been watching a few videos on what might happen to the north following brexit and one of the options is to reunify with ireland, which i believe, is not everyone cup of tea. me personally as an irishman, i have no strong feelings about this but i think it'd be nice to see a complete ireland on a map. however, i think i may have seen an option that hasn't been considered.

what if the north was to vote to rejoin ireland but in name only; establish yourselves as a separate state with your own government, your own police force (technically you have that already; Stormont and the PSNI) and your own currency.

could have the benefits of staying in the EU and not have the unpleasant taste of irish in your mouths. or am i talking rubbish? please, i'd to hear what you have to say.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Cryptopagan

blanch152 wrote: »

I heard the SDLP leader Colum Eastwood on Pat Kenny this morning about it.

His views on the issue would be as strong if not stronger than anything posted in this thread about it. Comments like "silly", "stupid", "plastic Paddy stuff", "lack of leadership", "astonishing lack of judgment", etc. were peppered throughout his contribution that pretty much dismantled any argument in support of Mary Lou.

That will not stop her receiving blind unqualified support on here.

Well, firstly I’d point out that I’m not offering “blind unqualified support” to the leader of a party I don’t even support.

Secondly, why don’t you actually present those arguments, rather than just assuring us the leader of SF’s main rival for the nationalist vote in NI “demolished” all contrary views on this?

Finally, I wouldn’t appeal to Colum Eastwood as an authority on how Northern nationalists perceive this, as his party has been consistently beaten in the polls by SF for years.

Dyr

Colum Eastwood? The Provisional Fianna Fail guy?

Nobody gives a damn about his opinion unless a state broadcaster wheels him out to have a pop at SF so the usual boyos can suddenly give great import to whatever purse clutching disapproval he's rabbiting.

Meanwhile everyone else pays zero heed to him. Beaten docket.

blanch152

Cryptopagan wrote: »

Tbf Peregrinus, you seem like someone who is quite far removed from SF anyhow, and the party’s leadership may already have calculated that jettisoning the trappings of traditional republicanism to try and attract people unlikely to vote for them is not a good strategy.

SF’s baggage from the Northern conflict already puts them beyond the pale for older, moderate voters in the Republic (I don’t think I know anyone over 50 who’d support them, and certainly none who’d admit it); what progress the party has made has been in appealing to and mobilizing voters from traditionally low turnout groups: young people and those in working class areas. Those people are just as put off by FG making an issue of this as you are by McDonald doing it in the first place.

I’d also add that tongue in cheek use of outmoded republican slogans and terminology is fashionable on social media now, so there are plenty of people who are as much amused as put off by the banner.

I heard the SDLP leader Colum Eastwood on Pat Kenny this morning about it.

His views on the issue would be as strong if not stronger than anything posted in this thread about it. Comments like "silly", "stupid", "plastic Paddy stuff", "lack of leadership", "astonishing lack of judgment", etc. were peppered throughout his contribution that pretty much dismantled any argument in support of Mary Lou.

That will not stop her receiving blind unqualified support on here.

Cryptopagan

Peregrinus wrote: »

I take your point. But for every person who has clutched at their pearls in public over this there are probably ten or twenty who saw the picture, felt as I felt about it and are that bit more distant from SF as a result. They don't post to social media about it, is all.

And, of course, quite a few of the those people probably only saw the picture because of the pearl-clutchers who posted about it. So you may think that the pearl-clutchers are histrionic over-reactors whose own views you can sneer at, but that doesn't mean that their actions don't cause the party a problem, even if not an immediately visible problem.

So, yeah, a party leader needs to not give them this kind of opportunity.

Tbf Peregrinus, you seem like someone who is quite far removed from SF anyhow, and the party’s leadership may already have calculated that jettisoning the trappings of traditional republicanism to try and attract people unlikely to vote for them is not a good strategy.

SF’s baggage from the Northern conflict already puts them beyond the pale for older, moderate voters in the Republic (I don’t think I know anyone over 50 who’d support them, and certainly none who’d admit it); what progress the party has made has been in appealing to and mobilizing voters from traditionally low turnout groups: young people and those in working class areas. Those people are just as put off by FG making an issue of this as you are by McDonald doing it in the first place.

I’d also add that tongue in cheek use of outmoded republican slogans and terminology is fashionable on social media now, so there are plenty of people who are as much amused as put off by the banner.

FrancieBrady

Peregrinus wrote: »

They don't have to look for somethign in the past if you give them something in the present . . . like this.

This was a slip by McDonald. She should not have let herself be photographed anywhere near that banner. If there was to be any coverage about this, it should have been of McDonald urging people to move forward from such thinking, or at least of her modelling that behaviour herself. The party and its supporters need to learn from this, not whinge about it.

Well forgive me for thinking it is just more of the 'get Gerry' stuff as the outrage is coming from the same quarters.

What 'thinking'? Are you suggesting that there is some sort of threat in what ML was doing? That she wishes to return to a military campaign?

I would not be a huge fan of Irish-American input into Ireland or think for a minute they understand it, just as I would think the same of middle England understanding. But like any political leader they have a demographic they need to keep on board as well as a demographic they need to win over. It think SF have shown quite clearly that there are demographics they have no real interest in impressing or winning over, even if getting to power is the price they have to pay.

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And, like they did with the previous leader, if they can't find anything current to distract, they will find something in the past.. . .

They don't have to look for somethign in the past if you give them something in the present . . . like this.

This was a slip by McDonald. She should not have let herself be photographed anywhere near that banner. If there was to be any coverage about this, it should have been of McDonald urging people to move forward from such thinking, or at least of her modelling that behaviour herself. The party and its supporters need to learn from this, not whinge about it.

FrancieBrady

Peregrinus wrote: »

I take your point. But for every person who has clutched at their pearls in public over this there are probably ten or twenty who saw the picture, felt as I felt about it and are that bit more distant from SF as a result. They don't post to social media about it, is all.

And, of course, quite a few of the those people probably only saw the picture because of the pearl-clutchers who posted about it. So you may think that the pearl-clutchers are histrionic over-reactors whose own views you can sneer at, but that doesn't mean that their actions don't cause the party a problem, even if not an immediately visible problem.

So, yeah, a party leader needs to not give them this kind of opportunity.

And, like they did with the previous leader, if they can't find anything current to distract, they will find something in the past.
They will begin the 'SF need to change their leader and then they might attract our vote' disingenuous stuff soon.

*never heard the 'pearl-clutchers' term...nice one!

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I agree about the attracting support bit. But I don't think attracting the demographic who go into outrage overdrive at a quick snap at a St Patrick's Day Parade or who wait around for similar opportunities to take offence is SF's goal tbh . . .

I take your point. But for every person who has clutched at their pearls in public over this there are probably ten or twenty who saw the picture, felt as I felt about it and are that bit more distant from SF as a result. They don't post to social media about it, is all.

And, of course, quite a few of the those people probably only saw the picture because of the pearl-clutchers who posted about it. So you may think that the pearl-clutchers are histrionic over-reactors whose own views you can sneer at, but that doesn't mean that their actions don't cause the party a problem, even if not an immediately visible problem.

So, yeah, a party leader needs to not give them this kind of opportunity.

FrancieBrady

Peregrinus wrote: »

And rightly so. And SF should be very attentive. Now that they've embraced the ballot box, the only way to progress is to attract support from people who don't already support you. Which means the views of people who are not already your supporters are very, very important to you, and you need to pay attention to them.

The issue here, as I see is, is that the "England Get Out Of Ireland" slogan is, literally, 40 years old or more. Rightly or wrongly it comes across as fossilised thinking by a bunch of out-of-touch sentimental Irish-Americans. SF doesn't want to alienate potential support in Irish America, I get that, but at the same time this is not a stance, or an analysis of the question, with which SF ought to be associating itself. SF should have the confidence to say that, no, Ireland needs a slightly more realistic, nuanced and thoughtful analysis of the question that this, which doesn't focus on the perfidy of Albion but on the need to change thinking in Ireland. Which means they should be a bit embarrassed to have their leader photographed marching behind this banner. It's not a good look.

I agree about the attracting support bit. But I don't think attracting the demographic who go into outrage overdrive at a quick snap at a St Patrick's Day Parade or who wait around for similar opportunities to take offence is SF's goal tbh.
It would be a bit like me or anyone else making a big song and dance about Leo in the parade with McGregor, it is all kinda desperate really. No change from Adams time at all.
That Coveney was probably distracting from the McGregor thing shows how this outrage demographic has brought political debate down.

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes, I did know that.

So who is questioning her 'leadership' only those who always questioned the SF leadership from outside it...obsessively so.

And rightly so. And SF should be very attentive. Now that they've embraced the ballot box, the only way to progress is to attract support from people who don't already support you. Which means the views of people who are not already your supporters are very, very important to you, and you need to pay attention to them.

The issue here, as I see is, is that the "England Get Out Of Ireland" slogan is, literally, 40 years old or more. Rightly or wrongly it comes across as fossilised thinking by a bunch of out-of-touch sentimental Irish-Americans. SF doesn't want to alienate potential support in Irish America, I get that, but at the same time this is not a stance, or an analysis of the question, with which SF ought to be associating itself. SF should have the confidence to say that, no, Ireland needs a slightly more realistic, nuanced and thoughtful analysis of the question that this, which doesn't focus on the perfidy of Albion but on the need to change thinking in Ireland. Which means they should be a bit embarrassed to have their leader photographed marching behind this banner. It's not a good look.

FrancieBrady

Peregrinus wrote: »

She's leading Sinn Fein, Francie. Surely you knew this?

Yes, I did know that.

So who is questioning her 'leadership' only those who always questioned the SF leadership from outside it...obsessively so.

Peregrinus

She's leading Sinn Fein, Francie. Surely you knew this?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Unless Mary Lou has changed her hair colour since last year, I don't see her posing with the banner last year.

The issue is one of leadership, or in this case, the lack of it.

She isn't leading me nor you, as far as I know. So who is complaining about her 'leadership'?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why is it an issue now when it wasn't last year?

Is this on behalf of Unionist sensitivities?

Unless Mary Lou has changed her hair colour since last year, I don't see her posing with the banner last year.

The issue is one of leadership, or in this case, the lack of it.

FrancieBrady

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The issue isn't the banner (as pointlessly,vacuously "Irish-American" as it is) - That banner or at least a variant of it has been in the NYC Parade since 1948

The issue is the leader of Sinn Fein parading with it in 2019 - I would have thought that much was obvious to all.

Why is it an issue now when it wasn't last year?

Is this on behalf of Unionist sensitivities?

James Brown

Is it true Sinn Fein want the English out of Ireland? Well I never...
This is the biggest load of nonsense over absolutely nothing.
Next you'll be telling me Unionists wave the British flag and want them to remain in Ireland.
Is this view genuinely news to people or are political point scorers jumping on a not so rare photo OP?
The disgusting thing I saw regarding this was Coveney shamefully using this as an opportunity to score points by working in a comparison to the NZ leader re leadership. The man has no shame. Gutter Fine Gael 'politics'.

Avatar MIA

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The issue isn't the banner (as pointlessly,vacuously "Irish-American" as it is) - That banner or at least a variant of it has been in the NYC Parade since 1948

The issue is the leader of Sinn Fein parading with it in 2019 - I would have thought that much was obvious to all.

What's strange or surprising about it? It seems perfectly aligned with SF's raison d'etre.

Quin_Dub

FrancieBrady wrote: »

2018 banner and not a word about it. Are you being led by media generated outrage .....again? :rolleyes:

The issue isn't the banner (as pointlessly,vacuously "Irish-American" as it is) - That banner or at least a variant of it has been in the NYC Parade since 1948

The issue is the leader of Sinn Fein parading with it in 2019 - I would have thought that much was obvious to all.

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

2018 banner and not a word about it. Are you being led by media generated outrage .....again? :rolleyes:

Simon Coveney saying she's an embarrassment-don't blame the messenger

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

SF are truly embarrassing and are once again trying to stir up trouble-she should be ashamed of herself.
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/explanation-demanded-from-sinn-fein-leader-mary-lou-mcdonald-over-england-get-out-of-ireland-banner-37922299.html

2018 banner and not a word about it. Are you being led by media generated outrage .....again? :rolleyes:

MI%20England%20get%20out%20of%20ireland%20banner%20new%20york%20st%20patricks%20day%20parade.jpg

MI%20England%20get%20out%20of%20ireland%20banner%20new%20york%20st%20patricks%20day%20parade.jpg

RobMc59

SF are truly embarrassing and are once again trying to stir up trouble-she should be ashamed of herself.
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/explanation-demanded-from-sinn-fein-leader-mary-lou-mcdonald-over-england-get-out-of-ireland-banner-37922299.html

briany

Infini wrote: »

The difference is were far better at referendum's here than in the likes of the UK. We'd have people on our side pushing fact's and clear information and all it would take is to have people on hand to tackle the DUP's ignorant BS and any other headbanger like Sammy Wilson by hitting them with fact's and shutting them down if they try passing off misinformation and opinionated BS like they're facts.
Get the fact's across, get the reasons for a UI across and counter and shut down the idiot's trying to BS their way through argument's when they fail to back up their case with FACTS.

That's all fine in the RoI, but until the UK gets their referendum law straight, I fear the border poll up north would be an absolute sh*tshow.

BonnieSituation

I saw that this morning and couldn't help but think that's how it came across. Especially with our resident partitionists here.

jm08

circadian wrote: »

One of my biggest fears over a Border Poll is the risk of a misinformation campaign being run just like Brexit. We are very much in the scope and this would be an easy target to stoke tensions and cause chaos both sides of the border. How would we even begin to tackle this problem along with trying to maintain meaningful dialogue?

Campaign of disquading may have started already to frighten people of ROI off in this article.

Some interesting bits of information about the NHS though:

Urgent plans for health service reform are stalled, and waiting lists are out of control, with almost 95,000 people forced to wait more than a year for a first consultant-led appointment at a hospital.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/southerners-should-be-careful-what-they-wish-for-with-a-border-poll-1.3823289

The comments are well worth reading, particularly this one from Cat1:

...... to frighten people in the ROI in the light of current pro-unity polls there, part of the unionist agenda will be to place 'thought pieces' such as this in southern newspaper to frighten ROI citizens away from supporting Irish unity, and by the look of the responses here Ms Meredith's piece has achieved that. As a middle class, educated northern nationalist I would ask PLEASE don't allow it to. Our families were trapped on the northern side of the border after partition and unable to leave because we had farms, businesses and aging family here, while you in the south got to live free of British tyranny for a century. Many catholics have died here and current legacy proceedings are revealing just how dangerous it was for us for generations ......

James Brown

facehugger99 wrote: »

No, they won't.

NI's been very inconvenient for decades and there's no sign of it being dropped - that's just wishful thinking on your part - the evidence literally proves the opposite of your statements.

Twice you've selectively quoted me, avoiding a straightforward query.

If things get too tight, they might be more willing to support a poll sooner is all.

Would putting the economic good that might come from any backstop ahead of any antiquated sense of empire, (or as someone suggested culture) not make more sense?

facehugger99

Matt Barrett wrote: »

. They'll drop Northern Ireland when convenient. Look at their ignorance on it and the quality of Minister they assign to it.

No, they won't.

NI's been very inconvenient for decades and there's no sign of it being dropped - that's just wishful thinking on your part - the evidence literally proves the opposite of your statements.

James Brown

facehugger99 wrote: »

The 'empire' ponys up 10 billion a year to keep the lights on.
.

10 billion a year the ROI can't afford and won't pay.

They know what side their bread is buttered on and that won't be changing for the foreseeable.

So they shouldn't strive for improvement? You've not addressed my comment other than taking the word 'empire'. Would a backstop not put N.I. in a good position economically, or is that being too non-UK for the unionists?

The British will do what's best for the British. They'll drop Northern Ireland when convenient. Look at their ignorance on it and the quality of Minister they assign to it.

Avatar MIA

That's my experience as well, normally intelligent people stating as fact that a No-Deal brexit was what they were voting on in the referendum.

But it was a ridiculously vague referendum with no clear mandate. Technically, leaving the EU and slavishly following the EU rules and contributing the same money was in line with the referendum outcome. :rolleyes:

^^^ Off topic, so to add. The proposed soft border down the Irish sea - is that actually (pride aside) the best outcome for unionists?

Infini

circadian wrote: »

One of my biggest fears over a Border Poll is the risk of a misinformation campaign being run just like Brexit. We are very much in the scope and this would be an easy target to stoke tensions and cause chaos both sides of the border. How would we even begin to tackle this problem along with trying to maintain meaningful dialogue?

The difference is were far better at referendum's here than in the likes of the UK. We'd have people on our side pushing fact's and clear information and all it would take is to have people on hand to tackle the DUP's ignorant BS and any other headbanger like Sammy Wilson by hitting them with fact's and shutting them down if they try passing off misinformation and opinionated BS like they're facts.
Get the fact's across, get the reasons for a UI across and counter and shut down the idiot's trying to BS their way through argument's when they fail to back up their case with FACTS.

[Deleted User]

One of my biggest fears over a Border Poll is the risk of a misinformation campaign being run just like Brexit. We are very much in the scope and this would be an easy target to stoke tensions and cause chaos both sides of the border. How would we even begin to tackle this problem along with trying to maintain meaningful dialogue?